I find the debate over FiOS to be incredible. Some Investors didn't think the investment made sense and analysts even say there will be no way to get the investment in fiber to the home (FTTH) paid back.

What these arguments miss is the point. Consumers want faster and faster connections to the internet and this will only become more of an issue as homes get even more computers and internet connected devices.

Remember that the latest televisions at 1080p can provide a viewing experience which broadcasters are yet to support. This trend will likely continue -- hardware vendors will get farther and farther ahead of broadcasters. As it does, consumers will begin to opt for programming which is provided exclusively over very fat pipes.

These fat pipes will compete with the TV delivery of cable and phone companies mind you but that is a different angle on this story I will not delve into at the moment.

If consumers pay thousands more for TVs which are capable of showing higher quality programming, won't they also pay for higher quality programming? The answer to me is is certainly yes. This means there will be incentive for broadband-only super HD channels to exist.

We can also expect virtual world use to increase and this could be another driver of large amounts of bandwidth.

In short, applications which suck up bandwidth at once preposterus speeds are being invented constantly. Soon, the company which provides the fastest broadband speeds will have an amazing advanatage over others.

Just as Verizon Wireless is doing a great job of taking share with a fast and broadly available wireless broadband network, expect FiOS to become a bigger differentiator as consumers start to clamor for gigabit plus download speeds.

The only concern of course is WiMax and BPL -- but neither of these technologies seem to be capable yet of gigabit per second speeds which the future will call for.

I find the debate over FiOS to be incredible. Some Investors didn't think the investment made sense and analysts even say there will be no way to get the investment in fiber to the home (FTTH) paid back.

What these arguments miss is the point. Consumers want faster and faster connections to the internet and this will only become more of an issue as homes get even more computers and internet connected devices.

Remember that the latest televisions at 1080p can provide a viewing experience which broadcasters are yet to support. This trend will likely continue -- hardware vendors will get farther and farther ahead of broadcasters. As it does, consumers will begin to opt for programming which is provided exclusively over very fat pipes.

These fat pipes will compete with the TV delivery of cable and phone companies mind you but that is a different angle on this story I will not delve into at the moment.

If consumers pay thousands more for TVs which are capable of showing higher quality programming, won't they also pay for higher quality programming? The answer to me is is certainly yes. This means there will be incentive for broadband-only super HD channels to exist.

We can also expect virtual world use to increase and this could be another driver of large amounts of bandwidth.

In short, applications which suck up bandwidth at once preposterus speeds are being invented constantly. Soon, the company which provides the fastest broadband speeds will have an amazing advanatage over others.

Just as Verizon Wireless is doing a great job of taking share with a fast and broadly available wireless broadband network, expect FiOS to become a bigger differentiator as consumers start to clamor for gigabit plus download speeds.

The only concern of course is WiMax and BPL -- but neither of these technologies seem to be capable yet of gigabit per second speeds which the future will call for.